Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Arete-27B vs DeepSeek-V3.2

DeepSeek-V3.2 scores 58.6 (C) on agent readiness against Arete-27B's 55.1 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Arete-27B leads on risk and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Arete-27B C

Best for Agents that want Qwen3.8-27B's coding and tool use without its handling of politically sensitive topics, on a 24 GB card or a 128 GB machine

Ahead on

  • Risk, 55 against 50
  • Documentation and upkeep, 63 against 34

Watch for

No quantised build from Nous Research, so the GGUF route depends on a third party

DeepSeek-V3.2 C

Best for Teams with an eight-GPU server who want an MIT agent model with broad runtime support, or agents calling it through a hosted provider

Ahead on

  • Reach, 60 against 50

Watch for

689.5 GB of FP8 files and no smaller build from DeepSeek or a runtime library, far beyond 107.4 GB

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Documentation and upkeep Arete-27B +29

Arete-27B 63

Model card 8, no limitations, context length, languages or cut-off. Training data 20, the training pairs and the evaluation set are published with their counts. Last change 20, a commit on 6 November 2026. Responsiveness 0, none of 13 discussions has a reply from Nous Research. Version policy 5, a first release. File health 10, the files agree. 8 + 20 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 10 = 63.

DeepSeek-V3.2 34

The model card earns 14 when read with DeepSeek's own V3.2 model card PDF, which adds intended use and a parameter count, leaving languages and a knowledge cut-off missing. Training data earns 5, a general description with no cut-off. Last change earns 5, as nothing in the repository has changed since 1 December 2025 (338 days on 4 November) and DeepSeek's deepseek-recipe has no V3.2 code. Responsiveness earns nothing, with no reply from a deepseek-ai member in any of the 40 most recent discussions. Version policy earns 5 for earlier versions kept apart without dated notes. File health earns 5 because loading and parsing reports wait without a reply.

Reach DeepSeek-V3.2 +10

Arete-27B 50

Memory 10, the only build from Nous Research is the 54.7 GB BF16 release, which needs about 66 GB and fits the reference machine. Runtimes 15, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers run the base's architecture from those files, and llama.cpp isn't credited because Nous Research publishes no GGUF. Builds 0, no quantised build of its own. Terms 15, Apache 2.0. Download 10, not gated. Hosted 0, no provider. 10 + 15 + 0 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 50.

DeepSeek-V3.2 60

Memory earns nothing, because the only build from DeepSeek or a runtime's library is the 689.5 GB FP8 release, which needs about 827 GB with the fifth added. Runtimes earn the full 25 for released model code in vLLM, SGLang, llama.cpp and Transformers, and for Ollama 0.40.14, whose llama.cpp pin (b11963) carries the deepseek32 architecture with no gate in Ollama's server code, though its library entry stays retired; nothing from LM Studio. Builds earn 10 for the single FP8 precision DeepSeek publishes. Terms earn the full 15 for MIT with nothing added, and download the full 10 since the repository isn't gated. Hosted earns nothing, since DeepSeek's own API moved to V4 on 24 April 2026 and Hugging Face maps only DeepInfra as live for it on 4 November (Novita and Featherless in error), where the line needs two providers. Fireworks' model page says Serverless Not Supported and lists it only for on-demand deployment on dedicated GPUs, which is renting the hardware rather than calling a served model.

Risk Arete-27B +5

Arete-27B 55

File safety 25, safetensors only and no remote code. Provenance 15, Nous Research's own organisation, linked from its blog, with a hash on every file. Safety evaluation 0 and agent guidance 0, nothing published on either. Licence risk 15, plain Apache 2.0. Security programme 0, no way to report a flaw found. 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 55.

DeepSeek-V3.2 50

File safety earns 15, safetensors only but 10 off because prompts are built by running DeepSeek's Python from the repository. Provenance earns the full 15 for the deepseek-ai organisation and a SHA-256 on every shard. Safety evaluation earns nothing, since no results are published anywhere. Agent guidance earns nothing, since the notes about the parser and the developer role are usage notes, read alike for all three DeepSeek listings. Licence risk keeps the full 15 for plain MIT. The security programme earns 5 for the security@deepseek.com reporting address on DeepSeek's site, with no public advisories.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runArete-27BDeepSeek-V3.2Edge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%255060DeepSeek-V3.2 +10
Risk20%205550Arete-27B +5
Agent interface10%106060even
Documentation and upkeep10%106334Arete-27B +29
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 55.1/100C 58.6/100

Facts side by side

FactArete-27BDeepSeek-V3.2
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorNous ResearchDeepSeek
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0MIT
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-11-062025-12-01
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone2.3/5 (4)

Verdicts

Arete-27B

Qwen3.8-27B with its answers on politically sensitive topics retrained, four days old when read. The training data is published, which is rare. Nous Research ships BF16 only, so a small machine runs it from bartowski's GGUF, and the card documents none of the tool or thinking controls it inherits.

DeepSeek-V3.2

DeepSeek-V3.2 is an MIT-licensed reasoning model trained for parallel tool calls, with thinking chosen per request, for long agent work. It needs about 690 GB of FP8 files, eight 80 GB GPUs in vLLM's recipe and prompts built from DeepSeek's Python. The main risk is neglect, with no file changes since December 2025 and no safety evaluation.

Before you call either

Arete-27B

  1. Start it with llama-server -hf bartowski/NousResearch_Arete-27B-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja, a third party's conversion, or serve the BF16 files with vLLM
  2. Use the base's parsers in vLLM, --reasoning-parser qwen3 --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder, and check tool calls first, since the template differs slightly from Qwen3.8-27B's
  3. Thinking switches with enable_thinking in the template. The card's own evaluation ran with it off
  4. Expect answers on politically sensitive topics to differ from Qwen3.8-27B's. That is what the fine-tune is for
  5. Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented

DeepSeek-V3.2

  1. Start it with vLLM's recipe, vllm serve deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.2 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --tokenizer-mode deepseek_v32 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser deepseek_v32 --reasoning-parser deepseek_v3
  2. It doesn't fit the 107.4 GB reference machine at any qualifying build, so call DeepInfra (deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V3.2) or deploy it on Fireworks instead
  3. Outside vLLM, build prompts with encoding/encoding_dsv32.py and wrap parse_message_from_completion_text in error handling, since DeepSeek says it handles well-formed output only
  4. Pick thinking or chat with thinking_mode, and read the reasoning from reasoning_content
  5. Send developer messages only for search-agent prompts, the only use DeepSeek gives that role
  6. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 and keep prompts within 128K tokens

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Arete-27B or DeepSeek-V3.2?

DeepSeek-V3.2 scores 58.6 (C) on agent readiness against Arete-27B's 55.1 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Arete-27B leads on risk and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Arete-27B or DeepSeek-V3.2

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.